act of justice at the direction of a Minister commanding him in Gods name to execute judgement impartially yet the King doth not an act of justice in the name and authority of the Church And that is true which Beâ—anus saith What the instrument doth the principall cause may do where the Vicar or Deputy and the principall substitutâ—r of the Vicar are both civill persons or are both Ecclesiasticall persons for in a large and unproper sense the nurse is a sort of deputy under the nurse father the Father may take care that the nurse give milke and wholsom milke to his child yet cannot the Father give milke himself The King may take care actu imperato as one intending in a Kingly way that Christs body bee edifyed that the Priests and Prophets feed with knowledge the Church and sister of Christ and so are the Priests under the King and at his command to feed and to feed with wholsome food the flocke and in obedience to the King all are to do their duty and his care is universall over all and his end universall That which is the end of Pastors Doctors Elders Deacons Lawyers Judges c. is in an universall intention the Kings end even Gods honor by pâ—â—curing in a regall way that all do their duty in keeping the two Tables of the Law and so is hee the great politick wheel moving by his royall motions all the under wheeles toward that same end yet cannot the King without sinne and being like a Bird wandring from her nest do that which is properly Pastorall so that the Office is not subordinate to him but immediately from God yet are the operations of the Office and to Preach tali modo diligently sound Doctrine subordinate to him but in a generall and universall way as hee is a kingly mover of all to keep the two Tables of the Law Neither did the King as Suarez saith one and the same way appoint both the High Priest and the civill Judge And Cajetan saith he decerneth the two chiefe heads of Church and Common-wealth but hee appointed not both for God appointed Amariah to bee High Priest and not the King but here is nothing to prove the Kings headship Asa reformed the Church and renewed the Covenant Ezekiaâ— reformed Religion also and brake in peeces the Brazen Serpent and all these in the case of universall apostasie and the corruption of the Priest-hood did reforme the Lords house breake in peeces graven Images but all this giveth to them no mixt Ecclesiasticall power of making Canons of ordaining and depriving Pastors Whereas some object That the care both of temporall good and spirituall good belongeth to the Magistrate therefore hee must have a power to make Church Laws See Pareus For his care cannot bee supreme if hee must rule at the nod and beck of Church-men I Answer the connexion is weak hee who hath the care of both the temporall and spirituall good of the people hee hath a nomothetick power to procure both these two goods it followeth no way for then might hee have a power in his own person to Preach and administrate the Sacraments this power procureth the spirituall good but such as is the care such is the power the care is politick and civill Ergo the power to procure the spirituall good must bee politick and civill 2. Neither is the King to do all at the nod and direction of the Priesthood blindly and without examination That is the blind doctrine of Papists wee hold that hee hath a regall power to examine if the Decrees of the Church bee just Orthodox and tend to edification For hee is the Minister of God for good and to take vengeance on evill doing And there is no just obligation to sinne hee is not obliged to punish with the sword well-doing but evill doing and the Church can oblige the Magistrate to do nothing but that which in case there were no Church Law and in case of the Churches erring hee should doe 2. They object He to whom every soule is subject he hath a power to make Church Laws about all good but all and every soule without exception of Apostles or Church-men is subject to the civill Magistrate Ergo. The proposition is proved from the Law of relatives for he to 〈◊〉 we are subject he may give Lawes unto us for our gâ—â—d See Pareus Answ. He to whom we are subject may give any Lawes or command any manner of way for our good I deny the proposition in that sense for then he might in the Pulpit preach the Commandements of God for our good He might give Laws under the paine of excommunication It is enough that he may give Laws by sanction and civill enacting of Church Laws and pressing us by the power of the Sword to doe our duty for the attaining of a spirituall good He to whom we are subject he may give Laws that is presse in a coactive way obedience to Laws that is most true but it proveth not a nomothetick power in the King 3. They object What ever agreeth to the Kingly power concerning the good of Subjects by the Law of Nations that doth farre more agreeth Kings by the Law of God For the Law of God doth not desir 〈…〉 â—e Law of Nations But by the law of Nations a care 〈◊〉 Religion belong th to the King for Religion by the Law of nature is indâ—â—ed and brought in by the Law of Nations As Cicero saith And therefore to a Christian Kingly power the care of Religion must be due Answer we grant all for a care in a civill and politick way belongeth to the Christian Prince but a care by any meane whatsoever by Preaching or by making Church Canons is not hence proved by no light of nature or Law of Nations in an ecclesiasticall care of Religion due to the Christian Prince but onely in a politick and civill way 4. All beleevers even private men may judge of Religion not onely by a judgement of apprehension but also of discretion to try what Religion is true and to be holden and what is false and to be rejected Ergo farre more may the Christian Magistrate definitively judge of Religion so he doe it by convenient meanes such as are sound and holy Divines and the rule of Gods word The consequence is proved because the faithfull Prince hath supreame power which is nâ—mothetick and a power to make Lawes Answer it is true all private beleevers may try the Spirits whether they be of God or not but hence we may as well conclude therefore Princes may preach and administer the Sacraments as therefore the Prince may define matters ecclesiasticall For a eivill coactive power giveth to no man an ecclesiasticall power except he be called thereunto as Aaron was 2. The meanes alleadged are the judgement of holy and pious Divines and the word of God but Moses whom they alleadge for a patterne of a civill ruler who
the magistrate procureth is not onely a naturall happinesse and the quiet life of a civill societie but also the good and well doing of Christians as Christians to wit publick praying praysing preaching hearing of the word religious administration and receiving of the Sacraments all which the King as King is to procure for what ever good externall Pastors as Pastors doe procure that same also but in a civill and coactive way is the King as the King to procure and therefore his end as King is godlinesse and eternall life but he is busied about this end after a farre other and more carnall way then the pastor the weapons of whose warfare are not carnall 3. That the Kings end intrinsecall as King is more then externall and naturall peace is cleare because ill doing against which he as the Minister of God is to execute vengeance and wrath Rom. 13. 3 4. is not onely that which is contrary to externall quietnesse of the commonwealth and the naturall happinesse of civill societies but also that which is contrary to the happinesse supernaturall of the Church as beleevers in the way to life eternall for hee is to take vengeance upon blasphemy idolatry professed unbeleefe neglect of religious administration of the seales and the eating and drinking damnation at the Lords Table which are ills not formally contrary to externall quietnesse but which are directly scandalls and morall ills hindering men as members of the Church in their journey to life eternall for though men should never falle oâ— sinne against the externall quietnesse of the naturall happinesse of the members of a commonwealth yet the magistrate as the magistrate is to execute vengeance upon all externall ill-doing as blasphemy adoring of idolls 4. The magistrate as the magistrate in the zeale of God is to set himselfe against sinnes as dishonorable to God and his glory seeing the judgement that hee executeth is not mans but the Lords 2 Chron. 1â— 6. and hee is a little God in the roome of God yea God â—â—tteth judging in and through him Psal. 82. v. 1. and therefore his end is not onely to punish sinnes as they trouble the externall peace of the commonwealth but all externall sinnes that may wound the honour of God and against which the magistrate as he is such is to be armed and cloathed with zeale 5. Those who with Spalato teach that life eternall is not the end of the magistrate as a magistrate but onely the extrinsecall end of the magistrate or the end of the person who is the magistrate must foulely erre so it is not in their meaning the end of the office or kingly art to maintaine religion and piâ—tie but this is the end of the person cloathed with the office and so they deny that God hath destined the kingly office to helpe men as Christians to heaven and to promove Christs kingdome mediatory and they must bee forced to say God hath ordained magistracie to helpe men as men or as they have a life common to them with the beasts and not to helpe them as Christian men to â—â—ie from the wrath to come and obtaine life eternall which certainly is against the honour of magistracie which of its owne nature is destined for the promoving of religion else the magistrate as the magistrate is not a nurs-father in the Church nor to bring his glory to the new Jerusalem nor to kisse the Sonne nor to exalt the throne of Jesus Christ contrary to the Word of God 6. Yea they were onely to promove the Church as a societie of men and to set up the throne of justice for the second table of the Law and not a throne for pietie and for the first table of the Law which is observed by Augustine who will have Kings to serve the Lord not onely â—â—men but also as Kings in such sort which none can doe who are not Kings and that â—â— onely in civill â—ffaires but also in matters concerning divine religion which passage as Bellarmine corrupteth it on the one hand making the King a Governour of men according to their bodies and his old father the Antichrist a governouâ— of men according to their soules so doth that virulent libeller Lysimachus Nicanor with no reason inferre that the King is head of the Church and hath a Nomothetick power to impose the service booke and booke of Canons upon the Church of Scotland But because the King as King is to promove religion therefore saith Junius Minos Lyâ—urgus Charondas Zeleuâ—us and Numa obliâ—ged men to their Lawes by some colour of religion 7. Nor doe I thinke what is said against this by some learned men of great weight see Guliel Apollonius Spalatensis Tilenus Daneus Buâ—anus Professor Leidens Some say the magistrates power and the ecclesiastick power differ in the objects the Magistrates powers say they object is things earthly and the externall man the power of the Church is things spirituall and the inner man I answer these two powers differ in the objects no question I meane in the formall objects not in the materiall for the magistrate as a magistrate is a nurs-father and keeper and avenger of both Tables of the Law and hath a coactive power about hearing the word administration of the Sacraments Idolatry blasphemy and the right serving of God in Jesus Christ and these things are not res terrenae earthly things or things of this life but spirituall things Yea the affaires of Jehovah and the Kings matters 2 Chron. 19. 11. saith Amesius are not so different non it a disparata sunt as that the care and knowledge of the things of God belongeth not to the King sed it a distinguuntur ut in modo procurandi rex politice suas partes agat sacerdos ecclesiastice suas the objects of the magistrates power and of the Churches power may be materially and are one the same but the King worketh in a coactive and kingly way and the Church in an ecclesiastick and spirituall way For doe not both the King as King and the Church as the Church command and forbid one and the same thing doth not the King command the right worship of God and forbid Idolatry and the Blasphemy of God and doth not the Church in their Synodical Canons command and forbid one and these some things yea certainly but the King doth command and forbid by a kingly and coactive power under the paine of boâ—â—lv punishment as incarceration exile proscription or death according to the quality of the fact And the Church commandeth also the right worship of God and forbiddeth Blasphemy and Idolatry but by a spirituall and ecclesiastick power and under the paine of spirituall and ecclesiasticall censures as open rebuke suspension and excommunication and they differ not so in their ends as some teach so as the end of the Church powes should be the communion of Saints and the edifying of the body of the
Church which I grant is true and the end of the Ruler should be onely preservation of peace and the externall tranquillity of the Common-wealth yea I say from the Word of God that externall peace is too narrow an end and it doth belong to the second Table the Kings end as Nurse-father and his a like care is to preserve the first Table and as a Nurse-father to see that the childrens milke be good and wholesome though the milke come not from his owne breasts and so his power hath a kingly relation to all the Word of God and not to externall peace and naturall happinesse onely And the King as the King his end is edification and spirituall good of soules also but alwayes by a kingly power and in a coactive way by the sword whereas the Church are in their care of edifying soules to use no such carnall weapons in their warfare 2 Cor. 10. 4. For which cause that learned P. Martyr and 〈◊〉 Parker and also the Professors of Leyden say that Ministers deale with consciences of men Quoniam Spiritus Sanctus inquit Martyr vim suam adjungit cum praedicationibus orthodoxis the holy Spirit conjoyneth the power and influence of grace with sound preaching and the Magistrate doth onely exercise externall discipline And Parker reasoning against Whitgift and 〈◊〉 proveth well that the Church visible though externall yet is Christs spirituall Kingdome and that Church discipline is a part of Christs spirituall Kingdome and that the externall government of Christ by discipline is spirituall every way according to the efficient 1 Cor. 12. 1. according to the end spirituall â—dification Ephes. 4. 12. according to the matter the Word and Sacraments 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. according to the forme of working by the evidence of the Spirit 2 Cor. 2. 4. 13. And this is the cause I conceive why great Divines have said the object of the Magistrates power as a Magistrate is the externall man and earthly things because he doth not in such a spirituall way of working take care of the two Tables of the Law as the Pastor doth and yet the spirituall good and edification of the Church in the right preaching of the Word the Sacraments and pure discipline is his end It is true whether the blasphemer professe repentance or not the Magistrate is to punish yea and to take his life if he in seducing of many have prevailed but yet his end is edification even in taking away the life for he is to put away evill that all Israel may feare and doe so no more but this edification is procured by the sword and by a coactive power and so the Church power and the kingly power differ in their formall objects and their formall ends But Spalato speaketh ignorantly of Kings Who saith as the internall and proper end of the Art of painting the Art of sailing c. is not life eternall but onely to paint well according to the precepts of Art and to bring men safe to their harborie though the persons who are painters and sailers may direct works of their Art to life eternall so saith he the end of the kingly Art is not life eternall but onely the externall peace of the Common wealth hence inferreth he that there is no subordinatim betwixt the power of the Magistrate and the power of the Church but that they are both so immediate under God as the Church cannot in a Church way regulate the King as a King but onely as he is a christian man the Church may rebuke the King while as he abuseth his kingly power to the destruction of soules and that the Church power as such is not subordinate to the kingly power onely the King may correct with the sword the Pastors not as Churchmen and Pasâ—ors but as men who are his subjects But 1. whereas it is certaine the King in respect of politick power is the immediate Vicegerent of God and above any subject in his Dominions so doth the Bishop make the Shoe-maker the Painter the master-fashioner immediate unto God and censurable by none as they are Artificers even as the King is censurable by none as King and so the King is dishonoured who by office is the Lords annoynted and a little God on earth Psal. 82. v. 1. 2 The intrinsecall end of kingly power is no more the advancing of godlinesse and the promoving of the Kings daughter towards life eternall by the sincere milke of the Word as the Lords Vicegerent and Nurse-Father of the Church then the Painter as a Painter or a Sea-man as a Sea-man is to advance godlinesse for this mans intrinsecall and is onely a safe harbour and shoare to temporall lives not the harbour of salvation to soules and his end is onely a faire Image of Art in Paper or Clay not the Image of the second Adam and by this the King as King is interdicted of any Church businesse or care of soules to be fed by the Word or Sacraments to keepe them cleane if he looke to any of these as an end that is not the eye or intention of the King as King but of the King as a godly Christian saith Spalato hence to care for the spirituall good of the Church and the promoving of the Gospel is as accidentall as to say an excellent Painter such as Apâ—ies intendeth in his painting life eternall so the King by this looketh to the Law of God to Religion and the eternall happinesse of the Church by guesse by accident and as King hath neither chaire nor roome in Christian Synods nor a seat in the Church 3. If the meaning be that the King as King that is rightly exercisng the office of a King is subordinate to no Church power that is he cannot be justly and deservedly rebuked by Pastors that is most true but nothing to any purpose for so the Pastor as a Pastor Jeremiah as he doth truly and in the name of the Lord exercise the propheticall office cannot be deservedly censured nor punished either by the Church-synodrie or the King and Princes of the Land but thus way all members of the Church an I any one single beleever doing his duty should be as immediate and independent and highest next on earth to Christ as the King and his three Estates of the Honourable Parliament are in civill matters and as an Occumenick Councell or in our brethrens meaning independent Congregation which is against reason But if the meaning be the acts of a King as aberring from justice not as a King but as a fraile man may be censured and rebuked deservedly by Pastors in a Church way this way also the Pastor as a Pastor is not subject to the Church but onely as a fraile man and so nothing is said to the purpose in this more then the in the former But if the meaning be thirdly that which onely maketh good sense that the acts of the King abstracted from good or bad or as kingly or
had a nomothetick power in Church matters used not the advise of Divines nor the rule of the written word but as a Prophet immediately inspired of God gave Lawes to Gods people and prescribed a Law to Aaren and to the Priest-hood Now if rulers have such a power of defining Lawes they neede not follow the rule of Gods word But how shall they prove that Moses gave the Law to the people and the Priesthood as a King and not as the Prophet of God inspired immediately of God For if Moses his Law came from the ordinary power of Kings as it is such then commeth Moses Law from a Spirit which may erre for the ordinary Spirit to Kings is not infallible but with reverence to Kings obnoxious to erring God save our King 5. It is a Princes part by office to defend Religion and to banish false Religion and to roote out blasphemies and heresies Ergo he ought to know and judge by his office of all these But if he be to use the sword at the nodde onely of the Church without knowledge or judgement he is the executioner and lictor of the Church not a civill Judge Answ. In a Church right constitute we are to suppone that the Lawes of Synods are necessary and edificative and that the Magistrate is obliged by his office to adde his sanction to them not by an unfolded faith and as blind but he is to try them not onely by the judgement of discretion as a Christian for so all Christians are to try them but also saving the judgement of some Learned by a judiciall cognition as he tryeth civill crimes which he is to punish but his judiciall cognition is onely in relation to his practise as a Judge to authorize these Lawes with his coactive power not to determine truth in an ecclesiasticall way under the paine of Church censures Neither doe I beleeve that the Magistrate is not subordinate to the Kingdome of Christ as mediator but subordinate to God as Creator onely Though some Divines teach that there should have beene Kings and supreme Powers in the world though man had never fallen in sinne and a Saviour had never beene in the World and so that Kings are warranted by the Law of nature and Nations and not by any Law evangelick and mediatory yet we thinke with reverence this argument not strong for generation and creation and multiplication of mankind should have beene in the World though never a sinner nor a Saviour thould have beene in the world yet are creation generation and multiplication of mankind by our divines Junius Trekatius Gomaras Calvin Beza Melancthon Polanus Rollocus and many others and with warrant of the word of God made meanes subordinate to the execution of the decree of predeâ—tination to Glory which decree is executed in Christ as the meane and meritorious cause of salvation purchased in his blood What heathen Magistrates as Magistrates know not Christ the Mediator Ergo they are not means subordinate to Christs Mediatory Kingdome It followeth not For by Christ the wisedome of God Kings doe reigne though many of them know him not As they are created by Christ as the second person of the Trinity though they know not the second person of the Trinity It is their sinne that they know him not 2. It is objected The Magistrate is not given to the Church under the New Testament by the calling of Christ as an exalted Saviour as all the gifts instituted for the government of the mediatory Kingdome are instituted for that end Ephes. 4. 11. but it is instituted by God as governer of the World rewarding good and ill Rom. 13. 1. 6. Answ. Neither is creation a gift of Christ as exalted mediator therefore it is not a meane leading to the possession of that life purchased by the mediators bloud it followeth not For the Magistracy is a nurse-father of the redeemed spouse of Christ with the sincere milke of the word I meane a formall meane procuring by a coactive power that the Church shall be fed and it procureth not onely the Churches peace which respecteth the second Table of the Law but also godlinesse which respecteth the first Table of the Law 1 Tim. 2. 2. and Ephes. 4. 11. there be reckoned downe onely officers which actibus elicitis by formall elicit acts procureth the intended end of Christs mediatory Kingdome Not all the offices which procureth edification any way Such as is in civill Governours who are to see that the body of Christ be nourished and grow in godlinesse for that is an essentiall and specifick act of the Churches nurs-father 3. It is objected Magistracy compelleth men to the observance of Gods Law Deut. 17. and doth not immediately of it selfe by spirituall gifts of the evangell produâ—e its effects But all the mediatory Kingdome of Christ and the Government thereof of its selfe and its owne nature produceth the saving effects of the evangelâ— by vertue of its institution as faith repentance and salvation Answ. A Magistracy as a Magistracy of it selfe concurreth but in a coactive way for producing of peace honesty and godlinesse and serveth to edification but I grant not in such a spirituall way as a Church-ministry therefore it is not a meane subservient to the end of Christs mediatory Kingdome It followeth not It is not a spirituall meane Ergo it is not a meane The consequence is null and it is false that all the meanes of Christs mediatory Kingdome are of their owne nature spirituall for that is to begge the question for the Magistrate procureth that the Church be fed he punisheth blasphemers that others may feare and so abstaine and so be edified though the way be coactive yet is it a way and meane appointed of God as the nurse-father is a meane for the childs nourishing though the nurse-breasts be a more subordinate meane immediate meane 4. It is objected The Magistrate is not the Lords Ambassadour and minister in name of the Mediator Christ as the Minister is but it is extron â—call to the government of Christs Mediatory Kingdome and 〈◊〉 helpe onely to those things which concerne the externall man Answ. Hee who is called God and so is the vicegerent of God is Gods Ambassador politick commanding in Gods name but in another way then a preaching Ambassador commandeth and though Christ as Mediator may attaine to his end without the King as many were edified in the Apostolick Church where the civill Magistrate contributed no helpe and was rather an enemy to the kingdome of Christ and so Magistracy may bee called accidentall to Christs mediatory government but if this bee a good argument to prove that Magistracie is not subordinate to Christs mediatory kingdome then Oecumenicall and provinciall Synods consisting onely of Church men shall be no meanes subordinate to Christs kingdome because Christs kingdome may subsist in one Congregation without a provinciall assembly and circumcision is no meane subordinate to that kingdome in the Jewish
all of one Church of one Religion Answ. The terme Nationall-Church is not in the Word of God but I pray you in what sense can the Iewish-Church bee called a Nationall-Church I conceive not because of the typicall and ceremoniall observances that put a Church-frame on the whole Nation for if so then the name of a Nationall Church or a nationall Religion cannot by envy it selfe bee put in the reformed Churches or on Church of Scotland which hath suffered so much for Iewish and Romish Ceremonies But if the Jewes were a Nationall-Church because they were a holy Nation in profession and God called the Nation and made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Church externally called to grace and glory and the whole Nation commensurable and of equall extent then all Christian Nations professing the true Faith and the Gentiles as well as the Iewes Then the believing Iewes of Pontus Asia Cappadocia and Bythinia as Augustine Eusebius Oecumenius Athanasius doe thinke that Peter wrote to the Iewes yea and the Gentiles as many interpreters with Lorinus Thomas Lyra and others thinke are yet 1 Pet. 2. 9. an holy Nation and so a Nationall Church and there is no more reason to scoffe at a Nationall Church in this sense then to mocke the holy Spirit which maketh but one Church in all the World Cant. 6. 9. as Cotton Ainsworth and other favorable witnesses to our Brethren confesse And if the Gentiles shall come to the light of the Jewish Church and Kings to the brightnesse of of their rising Esai 60. 3. if the abundance of the Sea shall be converted to the Iewes true Faith and Religion And the forces of the Gentiles shall come to them vers 5. and if all flesh shall see the revealed glory of the Lord Esai 40. 5. and the Earth shall bee filled with the knowledge of God as the Seas are filled with Water It is most agreeable to the Lords Word that there is and shall be a Church through the whole World you may nickname it as you please and call it a VVorld-Religion a VVorld-Church As if the lost and blinded World Ioh. 2. 16 17. 1 Joh. 5. 19. 2 Corin 4. 4. were all one with the Loved Redeemed Pardoned and Reconciled World Ioh. 3. 16. Ioh. 1. 29. 2 Cor. 5. 19. as if wee confounded these two Worlds and the Religion of these two Worlds And if this World could meet in its principall lights neither should an universall councell nor an Oath of the whole Representative Church be unlawfull but enough of this before And what if the World bee subdued to the World and a World of Nations come in and submit to Christs Scepter and royall power in his externall government are the opposers such strangers in the Scriptures as to doubt of this Reade then Esai 60. 4. 5. c. 60. 11 12 13 14 15 v. 4. 5 6 7. Psal. 2. 8 9. Psal. 72. 8. 9. 10. Esai 54. 3. Esai 49. 1. Esai 45. 22. 23. Psal. 110 1 2 3 4 5. and many other places and there is a Kingdome in a Kingdome Christs Kingdome and his Church lodging in a Worldly Kingdome and Christ spiritually in his power triumphing over the World and subduing Nations to his Gospell Object 8. If Classicall Presbyters be not Elders in â—elation to the classicall Church and so to all the Congregations in it yee must forsake all these places where it is said the Elders of Jerusalem the Elders of Ephesus the Angels of the seven Churches which is absurd if they be Elders to all these Churches then 1. All those people in those Churches must submit their consciences to them and their Ministery as to a lawfull ordinance of God 2. All the people of those Churches must have voyce in election of them all 3. All these people owe to theâ—s maintenance and double honor 1 Tim. 5. 17. for if the Oxes mouth must not be muzlâ—d but he must be fed by me and my corne he must tread my corne and labour for me These Churches cannot all meet in one to ordaine and chuse all these Ministers and to submit to their Ministery Answ. The Elders are Elders of Ephesus and Elders of Jerusalem not because every Elder hath a speciall pastorall charge over every Church distributively taken for it was unpossible that one Congregation of all the converts in Ierusalem extending to so many thousands could all beare the relation of a Church to one man as their proper Elder who should personally reside in all and every one of those Congregations to watch for their soules to preach to all and every Congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in season and out of season But they are in cumulo called Elders of Ephesus in that sense that Kings are called the Kings of the Nations not because every King was King of every Nation for the King of Edom was not the King of Babylon and the King of Babel was not the King of Assyria yet amongst them they did all fill up that name to be called the Kings of the Nations so were the Elders of Ierusalem in cumulo collectively taken Elders of all the Churches of Ierusalem collectively taken and as it followeth not that the King of Edom because hee is one of the Kings of the Nations is elected to the Crowne of Caldea by the Voyces of the States and Nobles of Caldea so is it not a good consequence such a number are called the Elders of the Church of Ierusalem therefore the Elder of one Congregation at the Easterne Gate at Ierusalem is also an Elder of a Congregation of the Westerne Gate Nor doth it follow that these two Congregations should submit their consciences to one and the same Elder as to their proper Pastor to whose Ministery they owe consent in Election Obedience in submitting to his Doctrine and mainetenance for his labours all these are due to him who is their owne proper Pastor the as Caldeans owe not Honour Allegiance Tribute to the King of Edom though the Kingdome of Caldea bee one of the Kingdomes of the Nations and the King of Edom one of the Kings of the Nations But if indeede all the Kings of the Nations did meete in one Court and in that Court governe the Nations with common Royall authority and counsell in those things which concerne all the Kingdomes in common then all the Nations were obliged to obey them in that Court as they governe in that Court but no farther and when the people doe consent to the power of that common Court â—â—citly they consent that every one of these shall bee chosen King of such and such a Kingdome and promise also tracitly Obedience and Subjection to every one of the Kings of the Nations not simply as they are Kings in relation to such a Kingdome but onely as they are members of that Court so the Congregations acknowledging and consenting to the classicall Presbytery doe tracitly chuse and consent to the common charge and care that every Pastor hath as hee
Latine 3 A direction is put on the Prophets on these who speake with Tongues that they be not children in understanding and that they be in malice as children but as concerning understanding men v. 20. which agreeth well to Prophets as they are ordinary Pastors 4 What more ordinary then the comming together of the whole Church for prophecying v. 23. 24. and convincing of unbelievers aâ— 25. 5 the Prophets are to be limited to a way of speaking to edification as he who speaketh with Tongues who must speake by an Interpreter or then be silent in the Church v. 27. 28. 6 These Prophets aâ— our ordinary Prophets must speake orderly and that but one at once to eschew confusion v. 29. 7 What they speake is to be judged and put under censure for the whole Colledge must judge v. 29. 8. 8 And as the women are here put under a rule when to speak and when to be silent v. 34. 35. So are these prophets all which and divers other rules doe regulate our ordinary Prophets which clearely saith to me that this is a patterne of a Colledge of ordinary Prophets under that same policy and rules of policy as the ordinary Colledge of Pastors at Corinth and 3. To this Colledge agreeth a power dogmaticall of judging and censuring the Doctrine of the Prophets delivered 29. let the Prophets speak two or three and let the other judge This is not a power of judging that every Christian hath For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Piscator doth relate to the Prophets who are to judge But as I take it a propheticall judging which may by good anology warrant the juridicall power of a presbytery to judge and examine these who preach the word that there creep not in false Teachers into the Church And for Ephesus The huge number of Believers and yet making one Church Rev. 2. 2. saith that Ephesus was a presbyteriall Church as many circumstances evince Acts 19. for 1. Paul established twelve men Prophets who spake with Tongues and prophecied To what end did Paul set up twelve Labourers at Epheseus with diverse languages but to establish divers Assemblies did they all meet dayly in one house with Paul to heare him and turned silent Prophets themselves when they were indeed with the gift of Tongues to speake to the edification of Assemblies of divers tongues It is not credible 2. And v. 10. Paul continued here for the space of two yeares and was this for one competent number who did all meet in one private house how can this be credible 3. All that dwelt in Asia heard the Word of the Lord Iesus both Jewes and Greeks then in great Ephesus there behoved to be more then one Congregation 4. The great miracles done by Paul v. 11. 12. to admiration of all and to procure the imitation of false Prophets 5. The name of the Lord Iesus was magnified by the Iewes and Greeks that dwelt at Ephesus 6. There behoved to be a great work of God when great Ephesus turned to the faith It is 1. Remarkable that Christ the wisdome of the father directed his Apostles to the most famous Cities to cast out their nets for conquering of soules to Christ as in Indea they came to Samaria and to great Jerusalem in Syria to Antiochia in Grecia to Corinth in Italy to Rome in Asia the lesse to Ephesus now the Scripture is cleare the Apostles that ever we read planted but one Church as is cleare in one City in Ierusalem in Antiochia in Corinth in Rome in Ephesus and observe the basis and prime principle of our Brethrens independent Churches doth all ly upon this meer conjecture that the Lords Grace did restrict and limit the fruits of the triumphing Gospell in the hands of the Apostles the conquerors of the World to Iesus Christ that they planted but in the greatest Cities they came to and they appoynted Elders in every City onely one poore single Congregation as a patterne of all independent Churches and this consisted of no more then could meet conveniently in one House for Word Sacraments one Lords Table and one Ecclesiasticall Church court for censures Certainly this Church being a patterne to all instituted Churches could not exceed the number of a thousand men or two thousand Believers and this is a greater number by some hundreds I am sure then can make a competent Church-meeting and I hope no man could say we erred if we should now make eight or ten thousand one Congregation in ordinary as our Brethren say the first Congregationall Church of Jerusalem waâ— Bâ—t 2. This City was the mother City and flower of Asia 2. It was noble because of Diana's Temple the length whereof was foure hundred and twenty five foot the breadth two hundred and twenty foot the pillars were an hundred and twenty seven the height of every pillar was sixty foot Amongst which there were thirty pillars most curiously carded Others say they were an hundred and thirty seven pillars made by severall Kings the Temple was built by all Asia for the space of two hundred and twenty some say fourty yeares It was inlarged by Alexander And thither came all Asia the lesse to the Temple of great Diana For they had no other Religion here dwelt the proconsull of Asia as saith Philostratus It abounded with artes and Sciences Philosophers and Orators Chrysostom saith that in it were Pythagaras Parmenides Zeno Democritus it was compassed with excellent Cities and noble for Asiatick commodities see Plinius and Alexander Neopolitanus Ignatius highly commendth it from the purity of the Gospell All this I relate not as an unpertient digression but to shew that the Gospell behoved to be more mighty here then that Paul set up but one single Congregation and an Eldership congregationall only Acts 20. 28. v. 36. 37. Especially consider what Beasts Paul fought with at Ephesus for here were many Jewes who opposed him 2. All the multitude by the instigation of Demetrius avowing that their Diana was the goddesse not only of Ephesus but of all Asia yet God made the word so mightily to prevaile for v. 10. Paul remaining there by the space of two yeares all that dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord both Jewes and Greeks I aske how it could stand with Pauls universall commission to preach to Iew and Gentiles 1 Cor. 9. 20. 21. as an Apostle to â—emâ—ine neere three years at Ephesus for one single congregation and the erecting of one Congregationall presbytery 3. We see how zealously mad they have been on their Religion when they had such a curious Temple for Diana And 4. Demetrius and the crafts had their living by making silver shrines to Diana And 5. What power of the Gospell it behoved to be which made their learned men who used curious arts to submit to the Gospell and bring their Books and burne them before all men and the sums of these Books extended to a great
Earth Answ. I see this sayd without any probation Churches depend on many above them for unity but what consequence is this Ergo they depend upon one visible Monarch It is an unjust consequence Mr. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 2 pag. 26. The Graecians and Hebrewes made not two Churches but one Congregation they called the multitude of Disciples together v. 2. Answ. That the chiefe of both Grecians and Hebrewes were convened in one to give their consent to the admission of their Officers the Deacons I conceive but that all the thousands of the Church of Jerusalem were here as in one ordinary Congregation I judge unpossible Mr. Mather c. 3. pag. 27. 28. If your argument be good if thy Brother offend and refuse to submit tell the Church because Christs Remedy must be as large as the Disease then if a Nationall Church offend you are to complaine to a higher Church above a Nationall Church and because offences may arise betwixt Christians and Indians you may complain of an Indian to the Church Ans. Because ordinary communion faileth when you got higher then a Nationall Church and Christs way suppoleth an ordinary Communion as is cleare If thy Brother offend c. Therefore I deny that this remedy is needfull in any Church above a Nationall Church 2. Christs remedy is a Church remedy for Offences amongst brethren and Members of the visible Church And Indians are no Members of the Church and so being without they cannot bee judged 1 Co. 5. 12. We say that if the Magistrate be an enemy to Religion may not the Church without him convene and renew a Covenant with God Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson answer c. 3. pag. 29. if the supreame Magistrate be an enemy to Religion it is not like but most or many of the people will be of the same mind Regis ad exemplum as it is in France and Spaine and was in the dayes of Queene Mary and then the Believers in the Land will not be able to beare the name of the Land or Nation but of a small part thereof nor can it be well conceived how they should assemble in a Nationall Synod for that or any other purpose when the Magistrate is a professed Enemie nor doth God require it at their hands Answ. This is a weake answer the Christians under Nerâ— were not like their Prince and it s not like but sincere Christians will bee sincere Christians and professe truth even when the Magistrate is an enemy And 2. If your meaning be it cannot be conceived how they should assemble in a Nationall assembly when the Magistrate is an Enemy because it is not safe for feare of persecution Then you say nothing to the argument because the argument is drawen from a duty a Nation professing the Gospell after many backslidings are obliged to convene in a Nationall Synod and are to renew their Covenant with the Lord and your answer is from an ill of affliction and if you meane that because the Princes power is against their Synodicall convening this is nothing against the power of the Synods that CHRIST hath given to His Church But if your meaning be that it is not lawfull to them to convene in a Nationall Synod to renew a Covenant with GOD against the supreame Magistrates will I hope you minde no such thingâ— for so doe Malignants Now alledge that wee never read of any Reformation of Religion in Scripture warranted but where the Prince did contribute his authority because he onely is to reforme and he onely rebuked for the standing of the high places but hee may soone be answered 1. Both Israel and Iudah were so bent to backsliding that wee read not that ever the people made any reall Reformation of Religion Josiah Hezekiah and Asa did it for them But what an argument is this Iudah did never for the most of the Land seeke the Lord God of their Fathers with all their heart Ergo the seeking of the Lord God with all the heart is an unwritten tradition 2. Princes are obliged to remove high places But are they obliged with their owne Hands to breake all the Images No I thinke if they remove the high places by the Hands of their Subjects or command their Subjects to remove them they doe full well But I see not this consequence Ergo Princes onely are obliged to remove the high places it followeth not 3. If it be the Princes part to command his Subjects this duty of Reformation and removall of the high places then they may performe their duty without the Prince 4. There is a twofold Reformation one an heart-Reformation Sure this is not the Princes onely All the Land may repent without the King There is another an outward Reformation And that is twofold either Negative or Positiveâ— Negative is to refraine from ill and the unlawfull and superstitious manner of worshipping GOD as in new Offices not warranted by his Word Antichristian Ceremonies and a Masse-Booke c. Certainly all the Land are to abstaine from sinne though the King command not now all the Reformation for the most part in both Kingdomes is in obstinence from superstitious superadditions that defiled the worship of GOD and to this there is no necessity of the Magistrates authority more then wee needâ— the Kings warrant to put an Obligation upon Gods Negative Commandements All that is Positive is the swearing of a lawfull Covenant to observe and stand by the faith and true Religion of the Land but I see no more a necessity that a King warrant the lawfull Vow of twenty thousand then the Lawfull Vow of one Man seeing it is a lawfull profession of CHRIST before Men commanded in the third Commandement And to the observance of that Law of God which God and Conscience hic nunc doe oblige us there is no addition of a Kingly authority by necessity of a Divine Law required to make it valid no more then if all the Kingdome at such a solemne day of humiliation should all in every severall Church sweare to Reformation of life 5. The Apostles and Christ positively did reforme Religion and the Church without and contrary to the mind of civill authority nor is it enough to say the Apostles were Apostles but wee are not Apostles for upon this morall ground Acts 5. 29. Wee ought rather to obey GOD than man they reformed contrary to the Magistrates mind And wee doe but contend for that very same Faith Jud. 3. which was once delivered to the Saints So to Reforme is to seeke the old way and to walks in it Jeremy 6. 16. to turne to the LORD with all the heart Jeremy 1. and for this cause Jeremy 3. 10. Iudah is sayd not to veturue to the LORD with her whole heart but fainedly because when a zealous King reformed them they returned not with all their heart Whence Reformation of Religion must bee the peoples duty no lesse then the Kings and I believe such a divine precept carrying
the new sense of our Malignant Divines should bee black policy not sound Divinity if any Ierimiah or Prophet should say amend your wayes and turne to the LORD with all your heart and put away your Idolls and your strange Gods providing the King will goe before you and command you so to doe Hence I say that 's a poore Court-argument of Parasites for Kings Wee never read of any Reformation of Religion in Israel and Judah but when holy and zealous Kings commanded the Reformation Ergo the Reformation begun in Scotland without the consent of the Supreame Magistrate and a Reformation now prosecuted in England against the Kings will is unlawfull To which I desire the Malignant Divines to receive these answers for Justifying the zeale of both Kingdomes in their Reformation 1. It is a question if they question not the Reformation according to the substance of the action that is if they are not offended that the Queenes Masse the popery of Prelates and Divines under their wings and their Arminianisme and Socinianisme should be abolished or if they condemne not the Doctrine but question onely the manner of abolishing such Heterodox stuffe If the former be said iâ— is knowen never Malignant Prelate or other had grace by Word or Writing to entreate his Mâ—jesty for a Reformation and this is enough for the former If they meane the latter they bee very like the Pharisees who when they durst not question the Doctrine and Miracles of Christ they onely questioned the manner of doing And sayd by what authority doest thou these But because they are joyned to the Papists side and fight under their banner It is most evident it galleth their stomacks that Popery Atminianisine and Socinianisme are cryed downe else the manner of doing a good worke and such a necessary worke as Reformation would not have offended them so highly as to move them to kill the people of GOD an error in the circumstances of a good worke is very veniall to Papists and Arminians 2. Let them give to us since they argue from a practice a warrant of any such practice where a whole Land went on in a Negative Reformation without the Prince Ergo Negative precepts by this logick shall lay no divine obligation on us except it bee the Kings will to forbid that which GOD forbiddeth then suppose Episcopacy and the Ceremonies were the Idoll of the Masse established by a standing Law it should bee unlawfull for the Kingdomes to forbeare and abstaine from Idolatry except the Kings Law forbid Idolatry What were this else but to say we are obliged to obey Christs will but not except with a Reservation of the Kings will 3. This is an argument Negative from one particular in Scripture and therefore not concludent For it is thus Reformation without the King wanteth a practise in the Scâ—ipture Ergo it is unlawfull it followeth not except it want Precept Promise and Practise for the argument Negative from Scripture is onely undeniable in this sense And in this sense onely pressed by our Divines against Papists And therefore it is like this argument Purgatory is not commanded in this Chapter Idolatry is not forbiâ—den in this Commandement Ergo neither Purgatorie nor Idolatry is forbidden in Gods Word So let the adversaries give me a practise in the Word of God where a Brother kept this order of Christs three Steps Mat. 18. First to reprove an offender alone Secondly before two or three witnesses Thirdly in case of obstinacy to tell the Church and to these adde that the man was by the Church to be reputed as an heathen and a Publican And I hope because such a practise we doe not read yet it followeth not that it is unlawfull So where read you a Man forgiving his Brother seventy seven times Ergo it is unlawfull to forgive him seventy and seven times Where read you that Christ and His Apostles and the Christian Church in the New Testament raised Warre and Armies either to defend or offend but I hope Anabaptists have not hence ground to inferre then must all Warres be unlawfull to Christians for wee can produce warrantable precepts where we want practise Fourthly where it is said Kings onely are rebuked for not removing high places and Kings onely are commended because they are removed therefore none should reforme but Kings This followeth no wayes but onely Kings by Royall authority should reforme but it followeth not Ergo the people without the King are not obliged to reforme themselves in their manner for I am sure that the people should all universally resolve and agree never to sacrifice in the high places and accordingly to practise And to sacrifice onely in the place which the Lord had chosen to place His Name there at GODS expresse Law commanded Deuteronomy 13. 23. Deuteronomy 12. 14. 18. Deuteronomy 16. 2. 7. 11. 15. Deut. 31. 11. had beene a removall of the high places and a warrantable Reformation though the King should have by a standing Law commanded that they should sacrifice in the high places for the people are rebuked because 2 Kings 17. 11. They burnt Incense in all the high places 2 Chronicles 33. 17. Hosea 4. 13. and a Chronicles 20. 33. the reason why the high places were not taken away is For as yet the people had not prepared their Hearts unto the GOD of their Fathers If then not Sacrificing in the high places was the peoples duty they were to remove the high places in their place and so farre to reforme without the KING yea suppose the KING command the contrary the people ought to obey GOD and the Parliament may by GODS Law abolish Episcopacy popish Ceremonics and the popish Service though the KING consent not upon this ground that those he the high places of England for the which the Wrath of the Lord is kindled against the Land Fifthly the adversaries may read 2 Chronicles 15. 9. That the Strangers out of Ephraim and Manasseh and Simeon gathered themselves together to Asa without the consent of their KING and did enter in a Covenant to seek the Lord God of their Fathers Sixtly the Pastors of the Land are obliged to preach all necessary truth without the KING and accordingly are to practise what they preach now Reformation is a most necessary truth they are then to reforme themselves and Religion without the KING for the Word of GOD not the KINGS will is the Pastors rule in preaching and hee is to separate the pretious from the vile that hee may be as Gods Mouth Jeremy 15. 19. and Ezekiel 2. 7. Thou shalt speake my words unto them that was the Doctrine of Reformation not the KINGS words vers 8. But thou sonne of man heare what I say to thee yea Pastors are to preach against Kings and their sinnes 1 Kings 13. 1. 2. 3. Jer. 1. 18. Ier. 26. 10 11 12. Seventhly if no Reformation can be without the KING 1. People are not to turne to the Lord and repent thâ—m
of the evill of their doings and to prevent the Babylonish captivity or a worse judgement except the KING will and all Religion and. 2. Church-worship must bee resolved ultimately on the KINGS will and pleasure for if it be not the KINGS pleasure to reforme the people must continue still where they were and Scotland who contrary to the will and heart of authority at our first Reformation put away the Masse and Popery and established Religion in sincerity is greatly to bee condemned Luther had authority against him and the powers of the World it was one point of Reformation that John Baptist tooke up against the Law of the Land to preach against Herods sinne for if Popery be in a Land to leave Popery is a great degree of Reformation and if the people without the Prince may goe on in the greatest step of Reformation why not also in the lesser except you say the people without the King are not to abstaine from the grossest Idolatry under the Sunne which is to worship and adore the worke of the Bakers hands Mr. Mather Mr. Thomson The name Church 1 Cor. 14. 4 5. 35. 26 27. 28. is plainly given to that company that did assemble and come together for performance of spirituall duties and for the exercise of spirituall gifts as Acts 14. 27. Acts 11. 26. 15. 4. 22. 30. 1 Cor. 11. 18. 20 22. 23. 3. Ioh. 6. which places doe abundantly shew that a company gathered together to one place is called by the name Church as Cencâ—rea Rom. 16. 1. which could not containe many Congregations being but the prot of Corinth Answ. We seeke no more if it be called a Church which conveneth for performance of spirituall duties as some of your places doe well prove Ergo no assembly should have the name of Church but such as assemble for Word and Sacraments this now you cannot affirme and it followeth not the Church spoken of Matthew 18. is not assembled to Word and Sacraments But to bind and loose on Earth The meeting 1 Cor. 5. 4. is not for Word and Sacraments but to deliver to Satan for ought wee can read the word Church Acts 14. 27. is not an Assembly for Word and Sacraments but to heare how God had opened the doors of Faith to the Gentiles and whether this was preaching of the Word and receiving the Sacraments or rather a matter that concerned the Apostles and Elders that they might not thinke hard to preach the Gospell to the Gentiles I leave to the judicious Reader and if to be received of the Church Acts 15. 4. be a matter of word and Sacraments let all judge And if to lend a decree of a Synod Acts 15. 22. be the act of a Church assembled for word and Sacraments let the World judge and therefore all these places doe strongly confirme a Presbytery assembled for acts of Iurisdiction and matters that belong to many Churches as is most cleare Acts 14. 27. Acts 15. 4. Acts 15. 22. and seeing wee finde the name Church given to a meeting assembled onely for discipline or things that concerne many Churches for any thing wee can read or observe from the word as Acts 14. 27. Acts 15. 4 22. 30. Matthew 18. 17. and also the word Church given to a meeting assembled for the word 1 Cor. 14. 1 Cor. 11. 18. 20 22 23. Rom. 16. 1. and not for acts of Jurisdiction for ought that wee can collect from the word I beseech you Brethren why doe we contend if the word Church be a meeting of persons assembled to one place for spirituall duties sometimes for word and Sacraments onely sometimes for acts of Jurisdiction onely then is the word Church by our brethrens argument taken both for the Congregation and for the Elders of one or of diverse Churches and so wee have our intent And we desire our brethren to prove which they must prove if they oppose our principles that the word Church is never taken for the Eldership onely in all the Word of God but these places prove the contrary as I have shewen 2. Whereas our brethren say a company gathered into one place which is nothing else but a Congregation are called by the name of a Church I answer 1. Such a company is onely called by the name of a Church as I have proved for a company meeting for discipline onely Matthew 18. 17 1 Cor. 5. 4. is a Church also 2. It is false that a company gathered in one place are nothing else but a Congregation As you take the word Congregation for to you Congregation is an assembly of men and Women meeting for word and Sacrament with the Elders of the Church I appeale to the judgement of our reverend brethren If the Church Mat. 18. 17. assembled to bind and loose if the Church 1 Cor. 5. 4. though the Text speake nothing of the word Church assembled to deliver to Satan If the Church assembled Acts 14. 27. Acts 15. 2. to heare things which concerned the Apostles and many Churches rather then one If the multitude convened Acts 15. 30. to heare the decree of the Synod read and if the Church of Apostles and Elders from Antiosh and Ierusalem Acts 15. 22. be a Congregation or a Congregationall Church assembled for word and Sacraments as the word Church is taken Acts 11. 26. 1 Cor. 11 20 22 33. Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson Num. 8. 10. The children of Israel which were not the Church of Officers layd on hands on the Levites therefore when a Church hath no Elders the people may conferre ordination and it is not to be tyed to the Presbytery onely Hence other of our Brethren say ordination is but accidentall to a Ministers calling and may be wanting if the people shall chuse in the defect of Elders Answ. Here two poynts are to be discussed shortly 1. If Ordination belong to the People 2. If Ordination to a certaine stick be necessary for certainly the people doe not call but to a certaine flock To the first I say There is not a place in all the Word of God where the people conferre ordination to the Pastors of the New Testament Therefore our brethren flee to the Old Testament to prove it from the Levites who received imposition of hands from the children of Israel but our brethren hold that the calling of the Levites and of the Pastors of the New Testament are different as the Officers and Churches of the Jewish and Christian Church are different 2. Our brethren grant pag. 49. That it wanteth all example in the New Testament that the people lay on hands 3. These who layd on hands on the Levite Num. 8. were Elders and our brethren say It is like they were but. 1. They did it not as Elders 2. But as representing the people not as Elders civill for that belonged to Aaron and his sonnes Levit. 8. else it will follow that where the Church hath no Magistrate to lay on hands the
is to be seene in these bookes of the Chronicles written after the Captivitie as 2 Chron. 5. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they might praise Jehovah and Chap. 32. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he writ letters also to raile on the Lord and so the parallell place 2 King 19. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the place as the Doctor citeth is well exponed by R. Salomon Iarcâ—i in his Commentary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is it was proper to the Priests and Levites 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to teach instruct as it is written Deut. 24. 28. according to al that the Priests and Levites shal teach you do yee but the Princes went with them lest they should have rebelled against their words that they might compell them to obey c. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in pihel signifieth this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in kall didicit in pihel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he caused him to learne Dan. 1. 3 4. Nebuchadnezzar commanded also Penaz 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to teach them learning and the language of Chaldea that honorable Courtier was not a Schoolemaster to teach the children of the captivitie himselfe but he did it by others The King of Syria saith to the King of Israel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou shall cure Naaman of his leprosie the Maide exponed it thou shalt cure him by another Elisha shall cure him Pilat scourged Jesus but Livius saith the Judge said to a burrio i. Lictor colliga manus so Deut. 31. 22. Moses therefore writ this song the same day and taught it v. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach them this song and put it in their mouth It was impossible that Moses in his owne person could teach the people and put this song in their mouth therefore he behooved to teach them by the Priests and Levites as 24. 25. 2. The Hebrewes may read so but he sent to his princes for the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a note of the accusative case of the dative of the genitive or of the accusative case with a certaine motion as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to David or of David Valet Haebraeis inquit Schindlerus ad in vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 super and it noteth a motion to a thing Gen. 2. 22. aedificavit he made the rib in a woman 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iud. 8. 27. and Gideon made it in an Ephod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Sam. 4. They annointed David 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bee King Then it must bee read hee sent to the Princes Benchail c. to teach in the Cities of Iudah v. 8. and with them he sent Levites v. 9. and they taught in Iudah there is not the least signification in the Text that the Princes taught Robinson Princes and Iudges are to open and expone the Law by which they governe else they governe with tyranny Answ. Judges are to convince the theefe and the murtherer 1. In a coactive way not in an ecclesiastick way 2. As these sinnes are troublesonie and hurtful to the State and Common-wealth 3 That others may feare to hurt the State by the like sinnes not that the malefactors may be converted to God and their soules may be saved but your lay-Prophets simpliciter not in ordine ad paenam are the onely ordinary converters of soules Robinson There is an excellent Sermon saith he of Iel oshaphats to the Iudges 2 Chron. 19. 6. and to the Levites 9. 10. and a divine prayer 8. 20. and Hezekiah hath an excellent Sermon to the Priests and Levites in the very Temple 2 Chron. 29. 4 5. And Nehemiah taught the people the Law of the Lord Kings are Shepheards and feeders not onely by government but also by instruction Answ. 1. These Sermons of Iehoshaphat and Hezekiah were first in time of extraordinary defections when the Priests whose it were to teach the people were corrupted and turned dumbe dogs 2. They were Sermons of Propheticall instinct and divine impulsions as the very stile of them cleareth and therefore cannot warrant Christian Princes to bee ordinary Prophets except you make the King a nationall Pastor over Pastors and two thousand Congregations for if as Prince hee bee their Pastor he is equally Pastor and teacher to all these Congregations and he must be as Prince obliged to bee a Prophet to convert all How exclude they a Pastor of Pastors and a diocesian prelate who introduce a nationall Pastor Yea how deny we a Pope if the King carry both the swords both of the spirit as a Prophet and that ordinarily by his calling to feed soules and the civill sword to take vengeance upon evill doers for whosoever preacheth the word of God as a Prophet hath the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven committed unto him to bind and loose to remit and retaine sinnes on earth and in heaven for the preached Gospell is the keyes of the kingdome as is the power of Church censures Then must the Kings have both keyes of Church and State and what hindereth but they admit the King as King and a nationall Pastor to be the head of the Church under Christ. 3. Consider the King as a Christian and gifted with learning hee is parens patriae and publick nurse father of the Church and may occasionally upon some extraordinary exigent at the meeting of the States or when his armies are going out to battell make use of the Word of God to exhort them to generall duties of Religion and Justice and to be prepared for meeting with eternitie and judgement and this he doth as a Christian father his subjects being his children but what is this to inferre that the King as King is a Prophet and an ordinary feeder of soules ex officio by office and that by knowledge and instruction as Robinson saith and an ordinary converter of soules and such a Prophet as doth preach in the Church ordinarily to the edifying of the Church and conviction and conversion of Infidels and gathering of a people to God as they say of their Prophets out of office 1 Cor. 14. 4 5. 12. 23 24 25. 31. And upon the same ground a King who hath the spirit of adoption may publikely pray as Jeboshaphat did for the Lord of hosts his presence to goe out with his Armies against the enemies of the Gospel but à speciei positione ad generis positionem male sequitur hee may be the peoples mouth to God in such an exigence and hee may give a word of exhortation anent duties generall of good subjects Ergo hee is an ordinary Prophet for the ordinary preaching of the Gospel to all his Subjects it is a loose and vaine collection Lastly Nehemiah a Prince taught the people saith he I answer Nehemiah was a Prophet and Author of Canonick Scripture as was Salomon and therefore his teaching proveth not the point Nehem. 1. v. 1. Nor can I finde where Nebemiah preached or prophecied to the people at all but
a Christian he is a member of the Church 5. The Kings power as King in things ecclesiasticke is not serviâ—e and meerely executive as the Churches servant to put their decrees in execution but it is regall princely and supreame 6. The object of the Kings power is not simply a peaceable life and externall peace of humane societies but also honesty and godlinesse but to be procured by a civill politicke regall and coactive way by the Sword of the secular arme as the object of the Church power is honesty and godlinesse to be procured by a ministeriall ecclesiasticall and spirituall power without any forcing of men by externall power 7. The end of Kingly power de jure by Gods right and divine Law exintentione Dei approbativâ is godlinesse but the end of Kingly power according to its essence and de facto is a quiet life though it attaine not Godlinesse as it doth not attaine that end nor can it attaine it amongst Pagans and yet there is a Kingly power in its essence whole and intire amongst Pagans where there is no godlinesse or Christian Religion 8. There is in Heathen Kings a regall and Kingly power to establish Christian Religion and adde regall sanctions to Christian Synods though there neither is nor can be during the state of Heathen Paganisme any Christian Religion there this power is essentially and actu primo regall yet as concerning execution it is vertuall onely 9. There is a difference betwixt a royall command under the paine of 〈◊〉 punishment with a royall power to punish the contraveners 〈◊〉 ecclesiasticke and a nomotbeticke power to make Church Lawes 〈…〉 hath the former power but not the latter 10. If the royall power be of that transcendent and eminent greatnesse as to make Lawes in all things belonging to Church 〈◊〉 and so as Camero must be heard saying that the â—ing is the supreame ruler and Church-men be as servants and instruments under him and doe all in the externall government of the Church by vertue of the Kings supreame authority the King is not much honoured by this for they must say that the King in the Physitian giveth dregs to the sicke in the Plow-man laboureth the earth in the fashioner seweth and sâ—aâ—eth garments whereas Paraeus who without reason also giveth to the Prince a nomothetick power in Church-matteâ—s doth except some things that the Prince cannot doe sometimes for want of right and law other sometimes for want of knowledge sometimes because it is against the dignity of his Majesty as in sordid and base arts 11. The power of governing the Church of the Jewes though it was ordinarily in the Priesthood the Sonnes of Aaron whose â—ippes did preserve ex officio knowledge Mal. 2. yet as the Prophets were raised up by God extraordinarily to teach they 〈◊〉 by that same extraordinary power did governe and therefore though the Kings of Israel were not Priests yet without doubt some of them were Prophets and as Prophets they did prophecy and as Prophets determine many things of Government by that same extraordinary power by which some of them to wit David and Solomon did prophecy and pen Caâ— niâ—k Scripture 12. There is one consideration of abuses and heresies manifestly re 〈◊〉 to Gods word and another of those things that are ordinar◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the former there is no neede of the Churches ministeriall power of condemning them and therefore Ezechias Josâ—as Asa â—â—osaphat did manifestly by the light of nature and Gods word 〈◊〉 abuses and Idolatry in Gods worship without the Churches 〈◊〉 seeing the Church representative was guilty of these cor 〈◊〉 us themselves but in the latter seeing the Kings place is to com 〈◊〉 and compell by externall force and bodily punishments and it is the Churches part to teach inserme binde and loose therefore the King can make no Church Canons Hence our first conclusion The Christian Magistrate as a Christian is a member of the Church but as a Magistrate he is not formally a member or part of the Church 1. Because he is neither a Pastor Doctor Elder nor Deacon as is cleare to any for these offices were compleate in the Church without the Magistrate Ephes. 1. 11. else Christ ascending to heaven should have given Kings for the edifying of his body Neither is hee as a Magistrate a part of the company of beleevers 1. Because then all Magistrates as Magistrates should bee professors of the faith which is knowne to bee false 2. Because the Magistrate as such is the head of an externall politick civill societie not of Christs body 2. The Magistrate as a Magistrate wanteth such things as essentially constituteth a member of the Church as a Magistrate onely hee hath neither baptisme profession nor faith because then heathen Magistrates should not bee Magistrates the contrary whereof the Word of God saith Jeremiah in Gods name commanded to obey the King of Babylon and Paul commanded to pray for Kings and heathen Magistrates 1 Tim. 2. 1. Hence let us have leave to deny these Hee who is the Churches nurs-father is the Churches father and a part of the family 2. Whose office it is to cause all in the visible Church to professe the truth obey God and keep his Commandements hee is a member of the Church 3. Hee who is a keeper and preserver of Law and Gospell by his office hee is by his office a member of the Church For the first hee is a father metaphorically and doth by an externall coactive power and by the sword nourish the Church and therefore is not the Church nor a part of the Church ex officio by his office as the nurs-father is not the child nor a part of the child whereof hee is nurse-father and this and both the other two are to bee denyed because the Magistrate doth neither nurse the Church nor cause the Church doe their dutie nor desend the Law and Gospell by any power that is intrinsecally Church-power but by the sword and coactive power which in no sort belongeth to Christs kingdome as a part thereof either as it is internall and invisible or externall or visible which is not of this world Joh. 1â— 36. 3. By no word of God can Salcobrigiensis and Weemes prove that the Magistrate as the Magistrate is a mixt persen and his power a mixt power partly civill partly ecclesiastick for â—â— the ruler commeth in amongst the ordinary Church-officers â— m. 12. Ephes. 4. 11. 1 Tim. 2. 2. which the Word of God doth â—â—ver insinuate and hee should no lesse watch for soules as â—â—e who is to give an account to God then other Church-officers Heb. 13. 17. for the Magistrates office may bee performed by himselfe alone hee himselfe alone may use the sword in all things which hee doth as a Magistrate as is cleare Rom. 13. 1. and 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14 the King judging his alone and the Kings deputie sent by him judging his alone is to
not morall nor acts of justice or injustice more then the acts of Painting of sailing of making of Shooes and thus the King is not subject to the Church power nor is his intrinsecall end as King justice and godlinesse and preservation of Religion the man speaketh non-sense and wonders for the King as a King is a morall agent and not infallible in his Lawes or administration Ergo as a King he is under the Scepter of the King of Saints in discipline and in the keyes of the Kingdome of God and so the kingly office is subordinate to the power of Christ in his Ministers and Church discipline and by that same reason the power and offices of Ministers as they are morall agents and obnoxious to sinne to false doctrine blasphemy idolatry idlenesse and sleepinesse in feeding the flock are under the coactive power of the supreme Governour and he doth as King use the sword against them hence it is cleare that both the kingly power is subordinate to Church-power and that the subordination is mutuall that also the Church-power is subordinate to the kingly power and that both also in their kind are supreme the kingly power is the highest and most supreme and under no higher coactive power I meane the kingly as kingly conjoyned with the collaterall power of Parliaments where the Realme is so governed and the Church-power is the highest in the kind of Ecclesiasticall power Joan. Major saith well that they are not subordinate that is not one of them is above another that I grant but that which he and Spalato saith neutri in alteram est imperium that neither of the two hath a commandement over another that we deny yet are they powers in office and nature different for they differ in their objects 2. Use and end 3. And their manner of specifick operations and the Kings power is not ecclesiastick Others say that there was a perfect civill policy having no need of the Church power anent the perfect civill government amongst the Heathen and in Christian Common-wealths the civill power of it selfe and of its owne nature can doe nothing for the attaining of eternall happinesse except we would goe to the tents of Pelagians whither Papists doe lead us while as they teach that the naturall end of civill power of its owne nature and intrinsecally is ordained to eternall happinesse But the civill power of it selfe doth conferre nothing whereby the spirituall power of the Church hath intrinsecally and properly and formally its dignity power strength and proper vertue and doth produce its owne proper effect and end because as saith Spalato the civill Magistrates end is of another republike different from the Church he is head of the Common-wealth and civill body see Apollonius But I answer there is a Policy civill without the Ecclesiasticall Policy and the King is essentially a King though neither he be a Christian himselfe nor his subjects Christians and to the essence of a King and to the essence of a civill government Christianity and a Church-power is not required yet hath the King as King essentially a right and civill coactive power to promove Christian Religion and the edification of Christs body though he be a Heathen the want of Christianity doth not take away his kingly right onely it bindeth up and restraineth the exercise thereof but though he be a King essentially and actu primo while he wanteth Christianity and so is a perfect Magistrate quoad esse and the State that he ruleth over a perfect civill body quoad esse in respect of essence and being yet is he not a perfect Magistrate quoad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 operari neither he nor his civill State and body are perfect in operations And it followeth not that the King as King can doc nothing about the obtaining of life eternall for as a King he hath a perfect right and kingly power to doe and being a Christian he actually exerciseth that power as a Nurse-father of the Church to see that the Kings daughter be fed with wholsome milke to see that the first and second Table be kept and that men serve Christ and have the seales of the Covenant in purity under the paine of suffering the weight of his royall sword and I wonder that this should be called nothing for the obtaining of eternall happines seeing it is a way to eternall happinesse to be thus fed under a Christian King as a King But say they it is Pelagianism that the Kings power compelling the Nurses to let out their breasts to the Kings daughter that she may sucke the sincere milke of the Word should be a meane of eternall happinesse I answer and it is also Pelagianisme to say that the planting of Paul and watering of Apollos and the ministeriall power and paines of Ministers without the grace of God can produce or effectuate supernaturall happinesse and it is false that the kingly power of it self doth confer nothing whereby the spirituall and ecclesiasticall power hath intrinsecally and formally dignity and power and its proper effect for it is true the kingly power maketh not the ecclesiasticall power but it setteth it on worke in a coactive way for the edifying of Christs body and doth causatively edifie Lastly whereas it is said the King as King is over the civill body and the Common-wealth which is a body different in nature from the Christian body or Church I say that is false for the King as King ruleth over men as men and also as Christian men causing them to keepe both the Tables of Law But 3. say they the office of a King is not a meane sanctified of God for a supernaturall good because it is amongst the Gentiles I answer this is no consequence for that office of it selfe is sanctified and ordained of God for keeping of both Tables of the Law and that it worketh not this in its owne kind is not from the nature of the kingly office but from the sinfull disposition of the Gentiles so the Word is the savour of death to some through their default Ergo it is not a meane sanctified for that end it followeth not But 4. the office of the King of it selfe and its owne power doth not governe or subdue the inward man for immediately and of its owne power it cannot bind the conscience but onely by the interveening mediation of the Word of God Ergo of it selfe it intendeth not to produce a supernaturall and eternall good Answ. Nor can the office of a Minister of it selfe and in its owne power produce a supernaturall good but onely by the authority of the Word Esa. 8. 20. Jer. 23. v. 22. Tit. 1. 9. 10. is it therefore no office sanctified for a supernaturall end But 5. they reason a supernaturall good and life eternall are effects flowing from the mediatory office of Christ bestowed upon the Church but the kingly power floweth not from the Mediator Christ but from God as Creator who
but wee uske who shall bee the visible ministeriall and vocall Judge under Christ speaking in his owne Testament for the King is a Politick and civill Judge and the Church an Ecclesiasticall Judge I answer this same is the question betwixt us and Papists anent the Judge of controversies whether the Judge bee a Synod or the Scriptures and wee answer by a distinction the Scripture is norm i judicandi 2. Christ the peremptory and infallible Judge speaking in his owne Word 3. A Synod lawfully conveened is a limited ministeriall and bounded visible Judge and to bee beleeved in so farre as they follow Christ the peremptory and supreme Judge speaking in his owne Word But wee deny that there is on earth any peremptory and in fallible visible Judge But to come yet nearer if the King have sworne to that same religion which the Church doth professe and so acknowledge and professe the reformed religion of that Church hee must then acknowledge the lawfull officers of that Church to bee his ordinary teachers and the lawfull ministers of the Church and that they are both in a Synod and out of the Synod to preach and to bee ministeriall definers of things contraverted and that they shall first determine in an ecclesiasticall way according to Gods Word and hee as King is to command them to determine according to Gods Word under the paine of civill punishment and the Kings civill and coactive way of judging is posterior and ratificatorâ—e of the right and oxthodox ecclesiasticall determination and Junius saith that the Magistrates judging politick presupposeth the Church judging ecclesiasticall going before and Calvin and Amesius are cleare that in this case the Church is to cognosce of hee owne ecclesiasticall affaires Ambrose writeth to the Emperor Valentinian that none should judge of this cause which is ecclesiasticall as one said but a Church-man qui nec munere sit impar neâ—jure dissimilis Gelasius the Pope inveigheth against Anastasius the Emperour because hee confounded these two civill and ecclesiasticall causes But if the Emperour or King professe not the religion of the land and repute it false and if the religion bee indeed hereticall then the Church is not constitute and the case extraordinary but the truth is neither the Kings judgement as a certaine rule to the representative Church nor the representative Churches judgement a rule to the King but the Word of God the infallible rule to both Judgement may crooke truth cannot bow it standeth still unmoveable like God the father of truth but in this case if both erre ex cellently saith Junius the Magistrate erring the Church may do something extraordinarily and tâ—e Church erring the Magistrate may do something also in an extraordinary way as coÌ„mon equitie and mutuall law requireth that friends with mutuall tongues bicke the wounds of friends Also fourthly some say they who make the King the head of the Church acknowledge that the King doth not judge except the matter be first defined in the Scriptures and in the generall councells yet they give a primacie spirituall in matters ecclesiasticall to the King and therefore if the King as King may forbid the inacting of wicked Canons hee determineth them to bee wicked before the Synod have passed their judgement of them I answer that learned Calderwood saith indeed the pretended Lords of high Commission have an act for them under Queene Elizabeth for this effect but it is made for the fashion for all errors and heresies are condemned in Scripture but not onely should there bee a virtuall and tacit determination of matters ecclesiastick which is undeniably in Scripture and may bee in generall councells also but also a formall Synodicall determination in particular must goe before the Princes determination in a constitute Church The Prince may before the Synods determination exhort to the determination of what hee conceiveth is Gods will in his Word but hee cannot judicially and by a Kingly power determine in an orderly way what is to bee defined in a Synod except hee infringe the Churches liberties and judicially prelimit under the paine of civill punishments the free voyces of the members of the Synod which is indeed an abuse of the authoritie of a nurs-father But fiftly it may bee objected that hee may in a thing that is manifestly evident by the Word of God to bee necessary truth command by the power of the sword that the Synod decree that or this particular so cleare in the Word the contrary whereof being Synodically determined hee may punish by the sword and so hee may judicially predetermine some things before the Sâ—nod passe their Synodicall act thereon and if hee may predetermine judicially one thing hee may predetermine all things I answer what the King may judicially determine and punâ—â—h with the sword that hee cannot judicially predetermine and command in any order that hee pleaseth but in a constitute Church whereof hee is a member and to bee taught hee is to determine judicially in an orderly way as a nurs-father But sixtly it may bee objected that if the King have a judiciall power by the sword to annull unjust acts then hath hee a power to 〈◊〉 them though hee abuse that power in making them as unjust and then hath hee a power to interpret Church acts and to defend them 〈…〉 Law saith it is not same power to make Lawes and to dâ—â—â—nd them and interpret them see Paraeus I answer the proposition is not universally necessary except onely in civill matters in the which as the Prince who is absolute hath supreme authority to defend and interpret civill lawes so hath hee power to make them for if the Magistrate hath a supreme judiciall power to interpret Church-Lawes hee is a minister of the Gospell in that case and may by that same reason administer the Sacraments so the argument is a just begging of the question 2. Though the King have power in case of the Church aberration which is somewhat extraordinary it followeth not therefore in ordinary hee hath a nomothetick power to make Church-Lawes Also seventhly it may bee objected if the King in case of the Churches aberration may by the sword rescind Church-Lawes then may hee make a Law to rescind them but those who aâ—firme that the King hath a sort of primacie and headship over the Church say not that the King hath any power formally ecclesiasticall to make Lawes as Ministers in a Synod do but onely that hee hath a power to command any forme of externall worship under the paine of bodily punishment they say not that the King may preach administrate the Sacraments or excommunicate or inflict any Church-censures I answer the transcendent power of Princesand their commissioners is not well knowne for the authors saith Calderwood agree not among themselves but it is true in words the author est Tortura torti the Bishop of Eli denyeth in words if you have strong faith to beleeve
should call Christs doctrine blasphemy Caesar and his deputie Pontius Pilat as Judges civill are to judge it truth Neither would I â—â—iâ—â—â—ly here contend for whether the Kings knowledge of herese in the major proposition bee judiciall or the knowledge of discretion onely as some say wee agree in this against Papistâ— that the King is not a blind servant to the Church to punish what the Church calleth heresie without any examination or tryall but though the Kings knowledge of heresie in the proposition and in Law bee judiciall and kingly yet because hee is to cognosce onely in so farre as hee is to compell and punish with the sword not by instructing and teaching It would not hence follow that hee is to make Church constitutions as King but onely that hee may punish those who maketh wicked constitutions because the Canon maker is a ministeriall teacher the King as King may command that hee teach truth and hee may punish hereticall teaching but as King he is not a teacher either in Synod or Senate in Pulpit or on the Throne now if the King by office ordaine Pastors and deprive them by office hee is to know who are able to teach others aâ—d must bee able also to stop the mouthes of the adversaries and to rebuke them sharpely that they may bee sound in the faith and this is required in Titus Ch. 1. 5 9 10 11 12 13. as a Pastor and as an ordainer of other Pastors therefore that which is required of a Pastor by his office must also bee required to bee in the King by his office 6. It is admirable that they give to Kings power to deprive ministers but with these distinctions 1. He may not discharge them to preach and administer the Sacraments but to preach and administer the Sacraments in his kingdome or dominions because the King hath a dominion of places 2. Hee may discharge the exercise of the ministery but hee cannot take away the power of order given by the Church 3. Hee may deprive say some by a coactive and civill degradation because the supreme magistrate may conferre all honours in the Christian common-wealth Ergo hee may take them away againe but hee cannot deprive by a canonicall and ecclesiasticall degradation 4. Hee may causâ—tively deprive that is compell the Church to deprive one whom he judgeth to bee an heretick and if the Church refuse hee may then in case of the Churches erring and negligence as King deprive himselfe But I answer the King as King hath dominion civill of places and times as places and times but not of places as sacred in use and of times as sacred and religious for his power in Church matters being accumulative not privative hee cannot take away a house dedicated to Gods service no more then hee can take away maintenance allotted by publick authority upon Hospitalls Schooles Doctors and Pastors God hath here a sort of proprietie of houses and goods as men have Places as sacred abused are subject to regall power hee may inhibit conventions of hereticks 2. The Apostles might preach in the Temple though civill authoritie forbid them 3. Kings are as much Lords of places as sacred and publick as they have a dominion of civill places in respect the King may be coactive power hinder that false and hereticall doctrine bee preached either in publick or private places for this hee ought to doe as a preserver of both tables and a beare of the Sword for the good of Religion and if they may command pure doctrine to bee preached and sound discipline to be exercised they may command the same to bee done in publick places The second distinction is not to purpose 1. To discharge the exercise of a ministery saith Calderwood is a degree of suspension and suspension is an ecclesiasticall degree to the censures of excommunication and therefore the King may as well excommunicate and remit and retaine sinnes which undoubtedly agreeth to the Apostles as hee can suspend 2. As for taking away the power of order it is a doubt to formalists if the Church can doe that at all seeing they hold Sacraments administred by ministers justly deprived to bee valid Ergo they must acknowledge an indeleble character in Pastors which neither King nor Church can take away If then the King deprive from the exercise hee must simpliciter deprive by their grounds it is weake that they say the King may deprive from the exercise of a ministry within his owne dominions for saith Calderwood they all know well that the King hath not power to deprive men from the exercise of the holy ministery in ether forraine Kingdomes For the third way of deprivation it hath a double meaning also 1. If the meaning bee that as the King by a regall and coactive power may take away all honours either civill or ecclesiasticall as hee giveth all honours then this way of depriving Ministers cannot bee given to the King for the King may give and take away civill honours for reasonable causes according to the Lawes But in ecclesiasticall honours there bee three things 1. The appointing of the honour of the office to bee an Ambassadour of Christ. 2. To give the true foundation and reall ground of a Church honour that is gifts and gracious abilities for the calling neither of these two doe come either from King or Church or from mortall men but onely from Jesus Christ who ascending on high gave gifts unto men and appointeth both office and giveth grace for to discharge the office Yea since morall philosophy maketh honor to bee praemium 〈◊〉 a reward of vertue the King doth not give that which is the soundation of honour civill for civill vertue is a grace of God but in Church honour there is a third to wit a deâ—â—â—nation of a qualified man for the sacred office of the ministry and an ordination by the imposition of hands used in the Apostolick Church Act. 6. 6. Act. 13. 3. Act. 14 23. 1 Tim. 4 14. 1 Tim. 5.22 Whether imposition of hands bee essentiall to ordination or not I disput not it is apostolick by practise yet there is something ecclesiasticall as praying of Pastors and an ecclesiasticall designation of men or the committing of the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 22. No Scripture can warrant that the King ordaine Pastors by publick praving by laying on of hands or ecclesiasticall blessing or by such an ordination as is given to Timothy and the Elders of the Church Acts 13. 3. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5,6 7,8 9. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2. If any say the King hath a publick and regall power in ordaining of Ministers and so in dâ—priving them or a mixt power partly regall partly ecclesiasticall as hee is a mixt person and the Church hath their way of purely and unmixt ecclesiasticall calling or ordaining of Ministers or the Church and the Magistrate
wayes 1. Effectually and so we thinke that the Kingly power is an Ordinance of God lawfull jure divinâ— many Papists say the contrary but we thinke with Gods word it is of divine institution as is cleare Psal. 2. 11. Prov. 8. 14. 15. Rom. 13. 1 2 3 4 5 6. Matth. 22. 21. 1 Pâ—t 2. 17 18. Eccles. 9. 20. Prov. 25. 2. Prov. 20. 2. 2 The Kings power may be thought divine formally and so as divine is opposed to civill it is a humane ordinance and not formally divine or ecclesiasticall nor subjectively 3. It may be thought divine and ecclesiastick objectively and finaliter The end intrinsecall being a spirituall good and so the King hath power to conveene Synods not onely as they are men and his Subjects but also as they bee such subjects and Christian men and members of Synods as the King may command the minister of the Gospell both as a man yea and as a Preacher in the Pulpit to preach â—ound doctrine and to give wholesome and good milke to the Church and this is formally an act of a nurie-father such as the King is by his Kingly office and this way also doth the King send members to the Synod and moderate and preside in Synods actu impâ—rato nâ—n elicito actu objective ecclesiastico non intrinsece non formaliter non subjective ecclesâ—astico The King ruleth by the Sword and commandeth the Synods to meete ordereth politically and civilly the members and meeting and as King cooperateth but by a civill and regall influence with the Synod for the same very end that the Synod intendeth to wit the establishing of truth unity and the edification of Christs-body But this power of the Kings to conveene Synods is positive not negative auxiliary and by addition not by way of impedition or privation For the Church of her selfe hath from Christ her head and Lord power of conveening without the King beside his knowledge or against his will if he be averse as is cleare Matth. 18. 17 18. if they be conveened in his name he is with them not upon condition that the Prince give them power And Joh. 20. 19. there is a Church-meeting without the Rulers and a Church-meeting for praying preaching and discipline Act. 1. 13 14. c. without the Magistrate Act. 15. 1 2. and when the Magistrate is an enemy to the Church 2. Where Christ commandeth his disciples to preach and baptize Matth. 28. 19 20. and with all faith in the exercise of their ministry they shall be persecuted by rulers as Matth. 10. 17 18 19. Luk. 21. 12 13 14. He doth by necessary consequence command Church-meetings and Synods even when the Magistrate forbiddeth and this is practised 1 Cor. 5. 1 2 3 4 5. where the Magistrate is an heathen chap. 6. 1 2 3. 3. It should follow that Christ cannot have a true visible Church and ministry on earth except the Magistrate countenance his Church which is both against experience and Christs Kingly power who reigneth in the midst of his enemies Psal. 110. 2. And what glorious Courâ—bes had Christ in Asia with power of doctrine and discipline and â—o with all Church-meetings Rev. 2. chap. 3. where Tyrants did slay the witnesses of Christ Rev. 2. 13. and certainely by what power Kings alleadâ—e that Synods may not meet for the exercise of discipline and good order in Gods house by that same power they may say there should be no Church meeting for the hearing of the word and receiving the Sacraments without their authority For Church Synods for doctrine differ not in spece and nature from Synods for discipline all be one and the same acts under Christ as King and head of his Church for which see Spalato Uâ—â—tius Amâ—sius Calderwood the Professors â—â— Lâ—yden Now what any say on the contrary for the power of Princes in matters ecclesiasticall is soone answered Gerardus saith that Moses gave Lawes both to the People and Priests Exod. 20. Lev. 8. Num. 3. I answer if this be a good argument the Magistrate his alone without advise of the Church may impose Lawes yea and institute new Laws and dite Canonicall Scripture also as did Moses Deut. 5. Exod. 20. but it is certaine that Moses gave these Laws not as a Magistrate but as a Prophet of God who spake with God face to face and it is more for us then for our adversaries David also brought the Ark to its place at Gods speciall direction the Levites carrying it by Gods Law though they failed in that sinfull omission 2 Sam. 6. but 1 David did convocate the chosen of Israel even thirty thousand to reduce the Ark to its place and so the Levites and Church-men and did it not as King his alone as 1 Chron. 13. hee did it And Junius saith and the text is cleare that he did it by the counsell of an Assembly and the whole Church and that a King may doe that in Gods worship in case of the negligence of the Church that is warranted by Gods word is but his duty Now Jesuites answer not to any purpose in this for Becanus and Suarez answer nothing to Davids placing of the Arke in its place onely they say all the people conveved the Arke and danced before it as well as David but it is not hence proved that all the people are heads of the Church as they say the King is and Lysimachus the Jesuite seeth in this that wee aâ—â—ee not with his friends the Jesuits Solomon builded the Temple and dedicated it to Gods service but this is no ground to make the King a Law-giver in the Church 1. Because none can deny but Solomon did all this as a Prophet by speciall revelation for 1. if Solomon might not build an house to the Lord but by speciall revelation that hee should bee the man and not David his father 2 Sam. 7. 6. 13. farre more could hee not as an ordinary King build that typicall house which had a resemblance of Christ and heaven it selfe especially seeing the signification of the Holy of holiest in the Sanctuary is expressely given to the holy Spirit Heb. 9. 7 8. and the Temple was a type of Christ Joh. 2. 20 21. and they may say Kings by an ordinary power as Kings might pen Canonick Scripture as well as they could build a typicall Temple like Solomons God filled that Temple with his glory and heard prayers made in that temple and toward that Temple I thinke Kings as Kings cannot now build such Temples therefore Solomon by a Propheticall instinct built that house Jesuites give no answer to this for Suarez saith Kings may build Churches to God because of it selfe it is an act of Religion which requireth riches for the building thereof and for the dedication it includeth two 1. By some religious action to consecrate a house to God and this way onely the Priests by sacrificing dedicated the Temple and God by filling